Mobil 1 Toyota 0W-20 in Honda Insight hybrid

[blackman777]

Mobil 1 0w-20 on the left
Toyota 0W-20 on the right

1.0 liter 3-cylinder
2006 Honda Insight hybrid
4000 mile intervals, 134k on engine

BLACKSTONE: We like steady wear trends, and they don't get much steadier than this! We always say that it takes three samples to build a solid trend line, but the first two reports show nearly identical levels of wear after similar oil runs, so you're off to a really good start for this Insight. No moisture, dirt, or fuel was detected, so the oil was once again free of harmful contaminants, and there were no signs of air or oil filtration problems (low silicon and insolubles)

M1 ------- TOY
2 ALUMINUM 3
0 CHROMIUM 0
4 IRON 4
2 COPPER 2
0 LEAD 0
0 TIN 0
77 MOLYBDENUM 109
0 NICKEL 1
1 MANGANESE 1
0 SILVER 0
0 TITANIUM 0
0 POTASSIUM 1
94 BORON 18
12 SILICON 5
4 SODIUM 5

1414 CALCIUM 2305
747 MAGNESIUM 125
693 PHOSPHORUS 790
788 ZINC 906
0 BARIUM 0
.
50.5 SUSvisc210F 50.4
7.43 CSTvisc100C 7.40
415 Flashpoint 425
4.5 TBN 4.1
0.8 TAN 2.9

.

 

[tig1]

Why 4K OCIs?

 

[gregk24]

Looks good! Any noise difference between the two?

 

[demarpaint]

They're almost identical in terms of wear. Toss a coin, or use the cheaper of the two oils, and extend the OCI.

 

[blackman777]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Why 4K OCIs?
I am testing multiple oils and don't feel like waiting a full 7500.
And yes the Toyota oil did have more valve tapping than the M1.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: blackman777

Why 4K OCIs?
I am testing multiple oils and don't feel like waiting a full 7500.
And yes the Toyota oil did have more valve tapping than the M1.[/quot


The reason I ask is that 4K OCI for these two oils is not really a test. Run it out to 10K for a more realistic view of the OCI and type of oil you want. Just a thought.

 

[Rolla07]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
Originally Posted By: tig1
Why 4K OCIs?
I am testing multiple oils and don't feel like waiting a full 7500.
And yes the Toyota oil did have more valve tapping than the M1.


Havent used M1 yet but I did find TGMO was noisier. Im running PU the next 2 OCI's but gona try M1 after that. Look very similar here tho....

 

[dnewton3]

Wear is well in control, but these engines are nortiously easy on lube, and your OCI is too short. I would expect nothing but this from about any decent lube. Need to greatly extend your OCIs to get any value from your selection.

You'll never be able to declare one "better" than the other in such testing, either.

 

[blackman777]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Wear is well in control, but these engines are nortiously easy on lube
An underpowered 65 hp engine is "easy" on lube? I would expect it to be hard on the oil,due to lugging, and of course the engine is always running (except idle stop). I've also whipped this engine climbing up mountains (CA 57).

 

[webfors]

Looks good. TAN for the TGMO is interesting when compared to the M1.

 

[btanchors]

Originally Posted By: webfors
Looks good. TAN for the TGMO is interesting when compared to the M1.


Indeed, TAN on the M1 is interesting period. The VOAs I (and others) have done have a significantly higher starting TAN.

 

[CATERHAM]

Was there any fuel indicated in the UOAs as M1 and TGMO both lost 15% and 13% viscosity respectively?

The TGMO is more than 25% lighter than M1 at room temperature and of course more so at lower temp's so considering the wear numbers are the same it's proof positive that it's the more appropriate oil for your first generation Insight.

Of other oils to test, I'd suggest MGMO 0W-20 and the new G-Oil 0W-20.

 

[blackman777]

How can you tell looking at these numbers that Toyota oil is 25% thinner at room temp than Mobil 1? Since I may be moving to freezing Minneapolis soon, the thinner would definitely be better for -30F starts.

Normally I would use the Toyota oil except it cost $2 more per quart & I have to burn-up more gasoline driving to the dealer to get it. The Mobil oil is right there in Walmart (where I shop every week).

BLACKSTONE: .......No moisture, dirt, or fuel was detected, so the oil was once again free of harmful contaminants, and there were no signs of air or oil filtration problems (low silicon and insolubles)

 

[CATERHAM]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
How can you tell looking at these numbers that Toyota oil is 25% thinner at room temp than Mobil 1? Since I may be moving to freezing Minneapolis soon, the thinner would definitely be better for -30F starts.

Plug the virgin KV40 and KV100 spec's into a viscosity calculator like Widman's:
http://www.widman.biz/English/Calculators/Graph.html
Or for a quick check just compare the KV40 spec's and you'll see even at that temp' that TGMO is almost 20% lighter.

If you're moving to Minneapolis, and you're doing any sort of unaided starting at -30F then you might want to stick with M1 0W-20 as it's MRV @ -40 is better than any 0W-20.

 

[dnewton3]

Originally Posted By: blackman777
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Wear is well in control, but these engines are nortiously easy on lube
An underpowered 65 hp engine is "easy" on lube? I would expect it to be hard on the oil,due to lugging, and of course the engine is always running (except idle stop). I've also whipped this engine climbing up mountains (CA 57).

The macro UOA data shows these engines are very easy on lube. How hard the engine works is only part of the story. Solid lube system design and excellent manufacturing practices also make for a large part of the equation.

I stand by my comments; these engines are pretty easy on lube.

 

[blackman777]

Understood. Low HP == easy. And of course no turbo so no issues there either.

 

[gpshumway]

Low horsepower does not equal easy on oil. Easy on oil equals easy on oil. Plenty of sludge-prone engines don't have great output. Think Chrysler/Mitsu V6 from ~1996, certain Toyotas of the same vintage, VW/Audi 1.8t (150hp).

The R18 (140 hp) engine in my Civic is prone to fuel-dilute with short trip driving, as are many of the current generation of direct-injected engines. You just have to do a few UOAs to see how your engine reacts to the way you use it.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: gpshumway
Low horsepower does not equal easy on oil. Easy on oil equals easy on oil. Plenty of sludge-prone engines don't have great output. Think Chrysler/Mitsu V6 from ~1996, certain Toyotas of the same vintage, VW/Audi 1.8t (150hp).

The R18 (140 hp) engine in my Civic is prone to fuel-dilute with short trip driving, as are many of the current generation of direct-injected engines. You just have to do a few UOAs to see how your engine reacts to the way you use it.


No, but lower power density engines TEND to be, in general, easier on oil, as they don't usually elevate oil temperatures in the way that high power density engines do.

Of course engine lubrication design (like your sludge examples) also plays a role.

 

[blackman777]

Hmmm my 1997 Mitsubihi V6 never had sludge issues. It ran great.